The New York Times Has No Shame

Even after the humiliating beatdown for covering up Biden's cognitive decline, the Times is still working overtime to protect the Democrats and go to war on Trump.

The New York Times not only missed the story of Biden’s cognitive decline, but they also actively helped cover it up, only making his age a potential campaign issue, but not having any curiosity whatsoever about just how bad it might be.

We’re seeing the same pattern playing now with the Russiagate scandal. They seem to be working overtime to help the Democrats out of the mess while signaling to their voters that the only story that really matters is the Epstein story.

And of course they would, right? There is zero chance they risk making their own Pulitzer-Prize winning reporters look like chumps.

There is no Page One story of the document drop, potentially the smoking gun that ties Hillary Clinton and the FBI to the smear at its inception. The only story they deigned to write was debunking the document drop, calling the emails fake and “Russian disinformation.” That’s all their flock needs to hear to shut it all out.

How easy they let themselves off the hook. How quick they are to deny that any of it has any validity whatsoever. They go out of their way to attempt to, once again, dismiss and humiliate the Trump administration for daring to suggest that their precious Democrats might actually be corrupt.

Instead, they offer up a sleazy pivot to the Epstein files. Their subhead editorializes and projects intent, which is not their job as journalists. How the hell do they know? They exist inside an insular bubble.

Besides, the Times, like every Democrat, knows there is nothing to the Epstein story except to do the Democrats’ dirty work of dividing Trump from his base.

This was Page One of the Times this morning:

Later in the afternoon, more obsession with how bad things are for Trump:

By now, no one I know on the Right expects anything less from them, but I do. I wish more from them. I keep hoping they’ll change. I keep hoping they will snap out of it. But how can they? They can’t risk all of their subscribers canceling their monthly fee, even though I am one of them and still haven’t canceled mine.

I check their archives and the archives of other newspapers going back 100 years. I can’t imagine looking back on today one hundred years from now and seeing just how out of touch their front page looks compared to all of the important news of the day, especially the revelations in the Russiagate story.

Why should I care? I don’t know, but I do. I think we need a strong newspaper that can represent the most important news of the day. I have always had the highest respect for real journalism. I credit the movies I spent my life watching that taught what it means to not only tell the truth but to chase the story.

In the film The Insider, Lowell Bergman is screwed over by CBS News for bowing to CBS Corporate over the tobacco lobby’s influence.

In Broadcast News I learned that in the news business you don’t manufacture drama to make the story better.

And in All The President’s Men I learned how important it is to make sure you double check your sources.

In All the President’s Men, most of the reporters at the Washington Post don’t think Watergate is a story. Even worse, they are embarrassed that two of the reporters from the Post would even bother.

While it’s true that then, like now, the objective was to bring down a president, and maybe All the President’s Men is nothing more than an origin story for the one-sided media empire to come, it is still disappointing to see the Times making the exact same mistake they did the four years Biden was in office, with no curiosity about whether or not he was up to the job.

At least the Washington Post attempted to write a headline that shows they’re looking into the story with some objectivity:

The New York Times did nothing but get the Democrats off the hook and pivot back to Epstein, making them nothing more than a mirror image of the late-night “comedians” whose only purpose now seems to be to showcase the Democrats in the best light and destroy Trump.

At the very least, they could have shown the Trump administration and the majority who voted for them some respect in the headline of the piece, to make it seem like they had at least some interest in taking the story seriously.

But in signaling to their pampered subscribers that the Russiagate story only exists to deflect from the Epstein story, tells me that there is no chance the New York Times ever becomes the paper it was once, or at least the paper I wanted it to be.

If I need a sneer and a dismissal hand wave, I can go talk to my Democrat neighbors about politics. I certainly don’t need it in what should be the most respected news outlet not just in the country but in the world.

Now I find myself doing exactly what I did in 2020 when the New York Times not only suppressed the truth on so many issues, from the Hunter Biden laptop to COVID to the violence in the Summer, heading over to the Right to find those hungry enough to chase the story.

One of the best of these is Jonathan Turley who wrote a piece laying the whole thing out - here is a sampling:

The Pledge

The trick began with the pledge, the stage where the public is set up by showing ordinary events with the suggestion that it is about to transform into something extraordinary. The key is to make something seem real that is actually not.

The Clinton campaign delivered the pledge by secretly funding the Steele dossier, using Fusion GPS and a former British spy named Christopher Steele, to create a salacious account of Trump being an agent of Russia.

And then:

The Turn

The next step is the turn when the ordinary becomes something extraordinary. This required the involvement of the government. The Clinton team worked behind the scenes to feed the dossier to the FBI. It would be the criminal investigation that would transform the ordinary accounts, like Carter Page speaking in Moscow, into an elaborate Russian plot. Even though the FBI was warned early on that Page was a CIA asset, not a Russian asset, the Clinton team found eager officials in the Obama administration to assist in the illusion.

And then:

The Prestige

The final stage is called the Prestige, where the magician faces the toughest part of the trick. As explained in the 2006 movie "The Prestige," the viewer is "looking for the secret... but you won't find it, because, of course, you're not really looking. You don't really want to know. You want to be fooled." However, "making something disappear isn't enough; you have to bring it back."

The difference is that this trick was designed to derail Trump and it worked. In the end, however, the Special Counsel and Inspector General both rejected the Russian collusion claims. The public then reelected Trump. Now, the prestige may be revealed by the CIA.

It’s worth a read. Check it out here.

I’m working on a piece right now about how the Democrats lost America, but one of the biggest ways is this. In relying on such one-sided, biased reporting, the Democrats have also lost touch with reality and have no way to even talk to the people of this country.

I hope to have that story up this weekend.